http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/10/31/funeral.protests.ap/index.html
2007-10-31 12:26:42 · 9 answers · asked by Yahoo Answer Angel 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
D: Albert Snyder of York, Pennsylvania, sued the Westboro Baptist Church
2007-10-31 12:34:37 · update #1
It is interesting that the church was held liable along with three of its leaders. Also interesting, for Baptists, is that two women were counted among the leadership.
Whether the government should be able to do it or not, they do.
Sadly, it has set a precedent. And we've seen what has happened of late with modern ones.
Mr. Phelps and co have protested funerals in the city where I live. Being a town with five military installations, we receive frequent visits from the group. Local religious leaders here have tried to reason with these people, to no avail.
Perhaps, unfortunate as it is, a legal intervention may help wake these people up, since being confronted in a scriptural manner has not knocked any sense into them.
Not holding my breath here. ; )
2007-10-31 17:37:16 · answer #1 · answered by tantiemeg 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know what laws the church broke, but that guy had a right to have his son's funeral in peace...he's only going to get to do it once. Protesting at an event like that makes the church hypocritical. I see by their platform that they probably think they have the moral high ground...but using a soldier's death to get more attention to your cause is immoral and unjust. The church members have in effect sullied this event which should have been solemn. I think they got what they deserved and the judges probably thought the award would discourage other groups from making the same mistake.
2007-10-31 19:38:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
You asked two different questions.
You cant impose on belief because you cant know what a person believes or thinks.
Now you can impose on speech when it violates the rights of others. That is exactly what has happened. The people were abusive and should have gotten fined/sued. Great job and thank you to parents of the slain soldier, they did another great service to this country.
2007-10-31 19:31:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Its not the US government imposing the penalty. Its a jury of average citizens. As for whether they should be able to do it? Yes of course they should.
Churches are not political parties. If they were, they wouldn't enjoy the tax free status that they do. What it boils down to is what the people on the jury felt was right.
2007-10-31 19:33:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Freedom of speech is one thing, but these people show a lack of regard and respect for the families of our soldiers. The penalty was not "imposed" by our government but by a jury of citizens. Completely fair.
2007-10-31 19:36:45 · answer #5 · answered by smsmith500 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I agree with the government's decision. I think everyone has the right to free speech or the right to protest. However, funerals are private affairs, and they aren't an appropiate place for protests. When you've lost a loved one, you deserve to be able to grieve in peace.
2007-10-31 19:42:26 · answer #6 · answered by jeniann13 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That is not a Church
2007-10-31 19:31:18 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is no penalty for their asinine beliefs.
But there is a penalty for their asinine actions.
2007-10-31 19:31:44 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Why not,,,where in a downward spiral anyway
2007-10-31 19:29:46 · answer #9 · answered by min77ion 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋